Dne 16.2.2011 17:40, Mamoru Tasaka napsal(a):
Michael Stahnke wrote, at 02/17/2011 01:14 AM +9:00:
> On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 10:00 AM, Michal Fojtik<mfojtik(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> On 16/02/11 16:52 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>>> * rspec - 1.3.0 -> 2.0.1 (stahnma)
>>>
>>>> - rspec 1.3.0 and rspec 2.0.1 have large difference, and it seems that
>>>> many packages depends on rspec 1.3.0 (I may be wrong). So maybe we
want
>>>> to package rspec 2.0.1 as rubygem-rspec-2 (correct me if I am
wrong).
>>>> Also please check bug650283
>>>>
>>>>> * rspec-core, rspec-expectations, rspec-mocks, rspec-rails (2.0.1)
>>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650280
>>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650282
>>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=650283
>>>> (all submitted by me), will check rspec-rails
>>>>
>>> Could we push this forward? Can I help somehow? It is quite late for F15
>>> unfortunately, is it wort of trying? RSpec 1.3 are not very useful for
>>> Rails 3 IMO.
>> Keep in mind that many packages are using 1.3 tests which are in some way
>> incompatible with 2.0, so before pushing this be sure it will not break all
>> builds which are using 1.3 ;-)
I know. And I keep it in mind. It seems there is currently 42 packages
that depends on RSpec. That is why I am a bit afraid of pushing them to F15.
>>
>> -- Michal
>>>
>>> Vit
>> _______________________________________________
>> ruby-sig mailing list
>> ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>>
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/ruby-sig
>>
> We may want to look at doing rspec2 as a new package. Lots of things
> are still using rspec 1.x, specifically many gems not related to
> rails. I should probably do some research on this and see how many
> are left on 1.x.
Well since we upgraded Rails 3 without fallback, I am fan of upgrading
RSpec without fallback. Anything else complicates maintenance in the
future. Moreover, I have packaged some packages (bundler, delayed_job)
which have specs written in RSpec2 and they could be with minor effort
executed by RSpec1 without any issues. So I hope also the opposite
direction should not be big issue. In theory, it should be even easier.
> Either way, I'll see if I can get a scratch build of rspec 2
going.
> I'm also completely willing to give co-maintainer rights to anybody
> who wishes to help out.
>
> stahnma
First, I will update the above 3 review requests (to use version 2.5.0).
Note that rspec-{core,expectations,mocks} 2.x can be installed in parallel with
rspec 1.3.0 (even in rpm form). Only rspec 2.x has to be renamed as rubygem-rspec2
(for example), or rubygem-rspec1 srpm has to be newly imported.
Thank you. I'll do rspec-rails once these gems are packaged.
Vit